Concept Care Solutions Ltd

Not everyone who used the service received personal care. CQC only inspects where people receive personal care. This is help with tasks related to personal hygiene and eating. Where they do, we also consider any wider social care provided.

People's experience of using this service People told us people they were happy with the care and support they received because they felt safe and their needs were met by kind and caring staff.

At the last inspection we found there were breaches of the regulations. Safeguarding incidents and allegations of abuse had not always been properly managed or reported as necessary to the Commission. Robust governance was not in place; audits and checks had been ineffective in driving the necessary improvements, and staffing levels were not always safe. At this inspection Improvements had been made in all these areas.

People had access to healthcare services and were involved in decisions about their care. Partnerships with other agencies and health professionals enabled effective outcomes for people. Staff supported people to take medicines safely.

Risks to people were assessed and regularly reviewed. Staff understood the actions needed to minimise the risk of avoidable harm including the prevention of infection. Staff had completed safeguarding training and understood their role in identifying and reporting any concerns of potential abuse or poor practice. There were improved systems in place to record or track incidents and allegations of abuse.

People and staff praised the managers of the service and agreed that they were approachable, knowledgeable, fair and did their job well. The staff team worked well together and supported the registered manager.

The staff team was committed to providing a high-quality service. They had undertaken training so that they were skilled and knowledgeable to effectively meet people's needs. Staff understood their responsibilities to report any concerns.

Staff encouraged people to be as independent as possible and respected people's privacy and dignity.

People were given choices about the way in which they were cared for. Staff listened to them and knew their needs well. Care plans contained information about each person's individual support needs and

preferences in relation to their care and we found evidence of good outcomes for people. When people did not have the capacity to make their own decisions, staff maximised their involvement and made decisions in their best interests, in accordance with legislation.

Recruitment practices were safe and relevant checks had been completed before staff worked at the service.

People told us that staff were able to meet their needs and were respectful of their individual preferences. Relatives told us staff who supported their loved ones were kind and caring.

People confirmed the service did not miss any care calls and that staff were usually on time.

People received care and support from a small group of staff, which provided consistency.

The managers of the service actively sought the views of people and their relatives about the running of the service and they dealt promptly with any concerns that people raised.

The provider had systems in place to monitor and improve the quality and safety of the service provided.

More information is in the full report.